Why am I having to repeat myself here? You can never push to origin unless it's your own project or your team's project.
> It's a constant cost in the same way that looking up where to submit your patch to is a constant cost. You will pay [...] N times, where N is the number of projects you contribute to.
In other words, it's not a constant cost.
Because you are incorrect and not reading the responses.
>you set origin to the branch you own...
They are referring to origin as the forked repository. E.g. if I contribute to nixpkgs (the NixOS package repository), I only have to fork it once, use that as my origin, and can create branches and submit PRs.
So, you are both right. If you contribute many times to the same repo, you only have to fork once. If you do a lot of drive-by contributions, you'll end up forking a lot of repositories.
(I fully agree that GitHub has a lot of overhead compared to git format-patch/diff. GitHub et al. also have some benefits in terms of communication. At any rate, diff/format-patch are not that hard, so I think any git user should learn it.)
That doesn't contradict anything I've written here, or anything I've written in years past on exactly this topic. But this _entire_ branch of conversation started with someone quibbling that I didn't rank configuration of remotes as a zero-cost operation. So, no, we're not both right.
Having to create a fork per PR is a rather antiquated way of doing it. In my experience, you can almost always push to origin and create a new PR from the branch, but maybe I've just been lucky with the projects I contribute to.
> It's not a constant cost, unless you're saying you only ever intend to contribute to one project ever. It's a fixed cost that you will pay N times, where N is the number of projects you contribute to.
It's a constant cost in the same way that looking up where to submit your patch to is a constant cost. You will pay both N times, where N is the number of projects you contribute to.